Riparian rights and boat dock damage
I posted this on the “slow” forum and only got one response so over here it comes.
I posted it as “Water rights….” but that may have come off wrong and led someone to believe it had to do with farming or irrigation.
Hopefully this will get some hits and start a good discussion. I don’t have an opinion (yet) one way or the other as I’m reading bits and pieces of law when I get time. Here’s the post C&P’d:
Here’s an interesting discussion that I thought I might bring up after camping this weekend. I’ll try to do a Cliff Notes version but bear with me.
Went to Hells Canyon this weekend to do some water skiing and general fun with the family. (BTW, my 5 year old son got up on water skis for the first time:-D . My BIL got chastised for powering his boat too close to the no wake zone at the camp ground by a F&G officer who happen to be driving by on the upper road. This is not the story I’m after but though I would bring up why F&G was in the area.
Anyway, near the end of their conversation, the officer suggested that my BIL not let the kids tube near a privately owned dock (0.5 miles up from the campground) because the land owners have taken boaters to court because of damage to the dock and items by passing by recreational boaters. Boats do create a hell of a wake when tubing because of the low speed and waterline.
I asked the officer if the owners had prevailed in any of the cases and he didn’t know. My thought was that the owners of said dock would not have any ground to stand on since it was a public waterway for the enjoyment of the public. Who’s to say that it wasn’t cause by an act of God? It’s a floating dock on a reservoir created by Hydroelectric dams on the Snake. This was on the Oregon side of the reservoir/river.
I don’t have the ability to search court cases on line in Idaho and don’t suspect I would go to the Law library and I also stuck out in Oregon (on line). The bulk of the original surveys for Idaho took place from 1906-1916, well before the dams were created so typical navigability would generally suggest the OHWM to be the boundary according to Idaho law. I don’t know Oregon law in regards to waterways but the originals were surveyed in the early 1900’s and the meanders around the “owners” land were resurveyed in the early 1980’s, after the construction of the dams. It appears that the didn’t change much, but I cannot locate the special instructions described in the introduction of the notes.
Ultimately, does the owner have a leg to stand on in a court case?
Rob
Log in to reply.